Why Keep Using the Wrong Camera?

Many a time I have been out testing a camera, and kicking myself for not also bringing along the P7700. Always running out of film before running out of subjects. It's a common thing, Dave. Or not being able to get the shot you want because you're standing there with a fixed lens 50mm, and could use something wider or longer. Or macro!

I would trade all my accumulated gear for the one camera that can do it all, but since that ain't gonna be produced, I'll just keep hoping I have the right camera for the moment. And if not, well, I'm not losing any sleep over it, Dave.
 
JChrome said:
For me, I wasn't terribly disappointed with the shots that I missed (even though I missed many), it was more about getting the image back and being disappointed that I didn't shoot it in medium (or large) format.

Nothing beats a properly exposed and focused 6x9 :). And so, the Fuji 690 100mm and 150mm are my travel buddies.

www.stillthrill.com
Click to expand...

Film format letdown.
 
I shared your frustration a few weeks ago eventhough I had "the right camera' I admit that I was the problem not the camera. I spoke of this in another of your threads the other week. I'm building a nice SLR kit. Just ordered a 35/2.8 FDn for my Canon. Might sell a couple of CV lenses & bodies. Depends on how I get along with carrying around & shooting the Canon. Right now I'm pretty stoked on shooting my project with my SLR.
 
After 47 years of everything, Canon RF, Pentax, Minolta SLR, Nikon F, Rollei TLR, Leica M, My new happy place is bottom-of-the-line DSLR with its kit lens. Regardless of brand, they are really simple to use, they're small and light, and have all the features I want. Like the Nikon D3300 with 18-55mm. Seems like a great little shooter to me.
 
Dave, you can swap the 35 for a long lens in seconds flat. Yeah, not as easy as a zoom, but it's not like you're crippled!

That said, you should shoot with what you are comfortable with. Sounds like using an RF is more stress for you than fun.

Speaking for myself, my missed shots are a function of my lack of awareness and insight, not the camera. ;-(

Randy
 
zauhar said:
Dave, you can swap the 35 for a long lens in seconds flat. Yeah, not as easy as a zoom, but it's not like you're crippled!

That said, you should shoot with what you are comfortable with. Sounds like using an RF is more stress for you than fun.

Speaking for myself, my missed shots are a function of my lack of awareness and insight, not the camera. ;-(

Randy
Click to expand...

Randy, yeah, an SLR, is as close as I can get to do everything. Leica M bodies are just not cutting it anymore. A digital or film SLR is far more capable than any Leica M.

Yes, I shoot macro, tele and portraits along with landscapes and fast moving field sports, sometime in one outing. Leica M bodies ain't gonna do that. Ever.

My gear has always held me back because I could not afford either the camera, or a lens, or even a tripod all these years. Raising a family, university tuition, medical bills, you name it, I always waited years just to get the basic gear for one application/task at a time.

Yes, gear is the problem because my "work"/shooting is not just documentaries. I used to shoot motorsports for a magazine. I used to shoot weddings and field sports. All in the same year or even month. Now my photography is limited but just as diverse.

As much as I love all things about my Leicas, they are too limiting for me. My creativity should never be limited by gear brand or even because it is RF. Why should I take an M3, a 50mm lens, and adapt myself to shooting only that? It is plain wrong thinking and frustrating. Imagine a TLR at a football game.

So, back to Nikon film and digital for me. One camera, a zoom and Bob's your uncle.:p
 
Vics--the D3300/18-55 is a super kit! I'm surprised at how good the pictures can be. If you don't already have one, it's a winner!
Paul
 
Lucadomi said:
I was disappointed from the images I got fro my Rolleiflex Automat after a trip to Italy.
I ended up selling it because of that. All the landscape shots on the Alps came out kind of faded out.
However, I had remorse later on because I loved that camera and the portraits really came out very good. I bought a Rolleicord to make up for the loss.
I still don't know what happened with those landscape pictures. It might have been my fault and not the camera after all.
Click to expand...

Faded means a dirty lens including internals or a film/processing issue.
 
After shooting street photography with small cameras for sometime, I begun to feel that I was not paying attention anymore and I needed to slow down.

So, I begun to carry a DSLR with a zoom lens. It did slow me down. I begun to actually stand still while shooting, and pay close attention to framing.

Now I have gone back to small cameras and sold my DSLR... I regret selling the DSLR and might buy another one.
 
Rangefinders are very good at a limited range of things, like most good tools.

Sounds like the stuff they do well (middle distance, fast, available light shooting) aren't really what the OP is looking for in a camera.

However it's like complaining that a Porsche doesn't hold the kids and groceries.

I avoided buying a Leica for a long time until it became apparent that the things they do really well are exactly what I needed the most and the sacrifice of long lenses and macros and that sort of thing wasn't a sacrifice at all for me. For me the limitations of the platform inspire creative solutions that make for interesting photos.

However I don't think rangefinders are truly a general use camera. Certainly the market decided this decades ago. Not sure why anyone would think otherwise at this point in time.
 
Pete B said:
I don't find myself having to photograph everything I see.
Click to expand...

Good one and so true.

I'm carrying a Zorki-1 with collapsible 50mm lens in my backpack or jacket pocket everyday. I'm fully aware of that I will miss the opportunity to shoot very close distanced insects or very far away flying saucers.
 
All cameras and lenses impose restrictions on the photographer. I believe there is pretty much always an interesting composition/capture to be made from a scene regardless of focal length. I find it easier to work over time with a fixed set of restrictions as implied by using say a rangefinder and a prime lens, than having to deal with ever changing limitations as I would get if I used a multitude of lenses or a super-zoom.
 
Paulbe said:
Vics--the D3300/18-55 is a super kit! I'm surprised at how good the pictures can be. If you don't already have one, it's a winner!
Paul
Click to expand...
My first foray into digital is similar, a Sony a200 that I bought very cheap last year, but I want to print bigger, so I'm looking at the Nikon with its 24 mp sensor. It also has a great VF, and the Sony doesn't.
But to the OP: I was in the same boat. I often found myself wishing I could shoot that picture, but found myself ill-equipped. Wrong camera, wrong lens, wrong film. I think the small and simple entry-level DSLR is the cure for all those problems, at least for me.
 
My experience has been the opposite.

O love Rf´s since i can pre focus and focus very fast, with reflex´s i just can´t focus properly...few weeks ago i got this superb leica R8 with a super glass...just couldnñt resist keeping it.

After the first roll i sold it...just can´t use it as i use my m9 or bessa.

Now i even have a fuji GF670 wich i love, perfect!

I think Rf´s are just the right camera for me.:D
 
I think taking pictures is one nice thing however not everything spectacular can be recorded with a camera. Just observing things is already something great.
I have a done a considerable amount of nice pictures with my RF Leicas as well as with SLR and if I will head to a nature trail I will most certainly carry a Leica with a wide angle and another one, or an SLR with a 90mm or 135mm.
 
RF and SLR are simply different beasts. I lov shooting with an RF, and also enjoy SLRs, usually for different applications, but sometimes just for a different mood or perspective.

My RF kit tends to favor small and light (and therefore slow) lenses, while for the SLR I own heavy and fast lenses with close focus abilities (Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/1.4 ZE is marvelous). My Canon 6D doesn't give me any particular pleasure in manipulating its controls, but the image quality is incredible with good glass.

The Leicas (M-E, M Monochrom and M5) are a delight to behold, and within the limitations of the lenses I own are my preferred tools, except for when they aren't.

Point is, it's fun to shoot, it's fun to limit myself and it's fun to explore the possibilities of whatever gear I happen to have with me. Whether it's the Canon with a zoom lens like the 24-105 L, the Leica with a prime or my point and shoot (Leica X) or even an iPhone, it's fun to challenge myself every time, and often my best pictures come when I have the "wrojg@ gear with me.
 
Vics said:
My first foray into digital is similar, a Sony a200 that I bought very cheap last year, but I want to print bigger, so I'm looking at the Nikon with its 24 mp sensor. It also has a great VF, and the Sony doesn't.
Click to expand...
Why? Get a Sony A58 (or a used A77 or A65) and enjoy the view through the EVF and use those great Minolta lenses you have :cool:

You always will have the wrong thing, if you bring a tele, you find something close to you. Just enjoy the pictures you do take, don't worry about the others....
 
At the end of the day, there will be those people who always seem to make a wonderful picture from whatever they have with them. I'm not one of them, but I can try to learn. It must be wretched to carry gear for every possibility, and no single camera and lens can do everything. I have learnt to be content with making a choice of camera and lens and going out to take the photos that follow from that choice. Now I just need to get better at it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom